Skip to content

· Public charity

National Digital Inclusion Alliance

NATIONAL DIGITAL INCLUSION ALLIANCE advances digital equity by supporting community programs and equipping policymakers to act, so that everyone has the opportunity to use technology to live, learn, work, and thrive.

$2.1M
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
15
States reached
$173k
Largest
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2025.

Community Improvement$1.9MCivil Rights$1.0MEducation$1.0MHuman Services$975kHealth$366kPublic Benefit$358kRecreation & Sports$123kArts & Culture$120kOther$0
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$119,066
Median grant
15
States reached
$3.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HOOPA VALLEY PUBLIC UTLITIES$173,426
FOREST COUNTY BROADBAND COMMITTEE$123,074
EASTER SEALS GREATER HOUSTON$121,788
CHEROKEE NATION$121,533
HOCKING ATHENS PERRY COMMUNITY$121,518
COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAM OF WEST$121,336
NATIONAL DIGITAL EQUITY CENTER$119,978
PUEBLO OF JEMEZ$119,450
CAYUSE NATIVE SOLUTIONS$119,066
COMMUNITY BROADBAND ACTION NETWORK$119,064
SHAPING OUR APPLACHIAN REGION INC$116,640
NORTHWESTERN OHIO COMMUNITY ACTION$116,314
LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL$114,894
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY$111,540
GILA RIVER TELECOMMUNICATIONS$110,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY23–25, $975k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 64% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%COMPUTERREACH: $105k → 11%COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAM FO WEST: $122k → 17%NORTHWESTERN OHIO COMMUNITY ACTION: $117k → 8%COMPUTERREACH: $104k → 11%COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAM OF WEST: $121k → 17%NORTHWESTERN OHIO COMMUNITY ACTION: $116k → 8%COMPUTERREACH: $52k → 11%COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAM OF WEST: $121k → 17%NORTHWESTERN OHIO COMMUNITY ACTION: $116k → 8%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

AK
ME
WA
WI
OR
IA
OH
PA
CA
KY
AZ
NM
OK
AL
TX
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.7M · 18 repeat orgs$577k to everyone else

18 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
5

Total granted

$5.7M
$577k

Still filing today

56%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthPublic BenefitEducationCommunity ImprovementOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • ES
    EASTER SEALS OF GREATER HOUSTON INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $366k · revenue +15%
  • SO
    SHAPING OUR APPALACHIAN REGION INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $351k · revenue +136%
  • AF
    ALASKA FEDERATION OF NATIVES
    3× · 2023–2025 · $306k · revenue +94%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $123k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $120k
  • WS
    WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2023 · $113k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Disability Network Capital Area

Transforming thinking to improve the environment and quality of life for people with disabilities

Human Services
2
Digitunity Inc

To achieve its mission, digitunity commits its time, expertise, energy, and influence to 1. cultivate a ready androbust supply of free or low cost computers to support digital inclusion; 2. establish or bolster local systems…

Community Improvement
3
East Tennessee Technology Access Center Inc

The mission of east tennessee technology access center is to connect people with disabilities in east tennessee to the adaptive technology tools and services they need to live with maximum independence and dignity.

—
4
Connect Humanity

Connect humanity works to expand digital access in rural, low and moderate-income, and historically underserved communities. the organization combines programmatic and financial tools - including grants, technical assistance, coalition…

Philanthropy
5
National Digital Inclusion Alliance

National digital inclusion alliance advances digital equity by supporting community programs and equipping policymakers to act, so that everyone has the opportunity to use technology to live, learn, work, and thrive.

Employment
6
Courtland Development Council

The primary function of the courtland development council is economic development for the town of courtland, alabama, population 949.

—
7
Hancock-Hardin-Wyandot-Putnam Community Action Commission

To reduce the conditions of poverty by providing comprehensive services to improve lives.to accomplish the mission, hhwp cac will collect and analyze data on the nature of poverty and the existing resources in the area. hhwp cac will…

—
8
Access Now

Access now defends and extends the digital rights of people and communities at risk.

Civil Rights
9
Central Arkansas Development Council

To provide services to low income individuals.

Community Improvement
10
Knowbility Inc

Knowbility, Inc. is a national nonprofit whose mission is to create an inclusive digital world for people with disabilities. We help make the internet and other technologies accessible to people who are blind, visually impaired, have…

Human Services
11
Alamo Area Community Network

The alamo area community network (aacn) is an alliance of community based organizations (cbo's) working to improve the health and well-being of individuals and families in the san antonio region. the aacn brings together human service and…

Human Services
12
Community Council of South Central Texas Inc

To be the service delivery agent to the poor. the agency will identify needs and prioritize them and promote, secure, and use all available resources to alleviate poverty. our intent is to enable low-income individuals and families to…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hockingathensperry Community Action; the most unlike its peers is Friends of the Pottsboro Area Public Library. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

10 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 23 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
3/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HOOPA VALLEY PUBLIC UTLITIES: $417,564 · OtherHOOPA VALLEY PUBLIC UTLITIESFOREST COUNTY BROADBAND COMMITTEE: $366,920 · OtherFOREST COUNTY BROADBAND COMMITTEEHOCKINGATHENSPERRY COMMUNITY ACTION: $365,554 · OtherHOCKINGATHENSPERRY COMMUNITY ACTIONPUEBLO OF JEMEZ: $359,352 · OtherPUEBLO OF JEMEZLUMMI NATION: $345,682 · OtherLUMMI NATIONALASKA FEDERATION OF NATIVES: $305,535 · OtherALASKA FEDERATION OF NATIVESCherokee Nation: $243,066 · OtherCherokee NationCAYUSE NATIVE SOLUTIONS: $238,132 · OtherCAYUSE NATIVE SOLUTIONSWASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY: $223,080 · OtherWASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITYGILA RIVER TELECOMMUNICATIONS: $220,000 · OtherGILA RIVER TELECOMMUNICATIONSFRIENDS OF THE POTTSBORO AREA PUBLIC LIBRARY: $219,668 · OtherFRIENDS OF THE POTTSBORO AREA PUBLIC LIBRARY+5 more: $576,972 · Other+5 moreCOMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAMS OF WEST ALABAMA INC: $365,008 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY SERVICE…NORTHWESTERN OHIO COMMUNITY ACTION COMMI: $349,940 · Human ServicesNORTHWESTERN OHIO…Computer Reach: $260,283 · Human ServicesComputer ReachEASTER SEALS OF GREATER HOUSTON INC: $365,600 · HealthCOMMUNITY BROADBAND ACTION NETWORK: $358,190 · Public BenefitNATIONAL DIGITAL EQUITY CENTER: $356,863 · EducationSHAPING OUR APPALACHIAN REGION INC: $350,923 · Community Improvement
Other$3,881,525Human Services$975,231Health$365,600Public Benefit$358,190Education$356,863Community Improvement$350,923

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEASTER SEALS OF GREATER HOUSTON INC: $365,600 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetHOCKINGATHENSPERRY COMMUNITY ACTION: $365,554 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetCOMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAMS OF WEST ALABAMA INC: $365,008 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetCOMMUNITY BROADBAND ACTION NETWORK: $358,190 over 3y, 97% of budgetNATIONAL DIGITAL EQUITY CENTER: $356,863 over 3y, 8.7% of budgetSHAPING OUR APPALACHIAN REGION INC: $350,923 over 3y, 4.1% of budgetNORTHWESTERN OHIO COMMUNITY ACTION COMMI: $349,940 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetALASKA FEDERATION OF NATIVES: $305,535 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetComputer Reach: $260,283 over 3y, 10% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds EASTER SEALS OF GREATER HOUSTON INC ↗
  • Who funds HOCKINGATHENSPERRY COMMUNITY ACTION ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAMS OF WEST ALABAMA INC ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY BROADBAND ACTION NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL DIGITAL EQUITY CENTER ↗
  • Who funds SHAPING OUR APPALACHIAN REGION INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTHWESTERN OHIO COMMUNITY ACTION COMMI ↗
  • Who funds ALASKA FEDERATION OF NATIVES ↗
  • Who funds Computer Reach ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE POTTSBORO AREA PUBLIC LIBRARY ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA1.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization National Digital Inclusion Alliance funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from National Digital Inclusion Alliance. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 23 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on National Digital Inclusion Alliance’s filings →

    More from the funding graph